Assessing the Benefits of Levees: An Economic Assessment of U.S. Counties with Levees Ezra Boyd Geography Graduate Student Louisiana State University Research sponsored by

Outline Data, hypothesis, and theory Analysis and results A look at Louisiana County with Levees Conclusions

FEMA’s List of US Counties With Levees Based on the National Flood Insurance Database Sept 2009: Levees.org obtains data from FEMA through FOIA – Data requested in March 2009 Oct 2009: Entered data in GIS and mapped – First map supported by La. State Medical Society Dec 2009: Used Census 2000 SF 3 data to examine the economic and social conditions associated with populations near levees

Basic Statistics from FEMA 55% of population lives in 28% of counties Suggests “Pull Factor” A social or economic benefit that encourages population settlement and growth

‘County with Levee’ Proxy For ‘Population settled in and near a floodplain’ Geography: The study of the Earth as the home of humans Geographers are interested in population trends and patterns Hazard geographers are interested in how environmental hazards influence population trends Example: Human settlement and modification of floodplains

Real and Perceived Economic and Social Benefits Of Floodplains Human Settlement and Expansion in Floodplains Structural Modifications of Floodplain’s Landscape Hypothesized Correlation between Levees and Social & Economic Wellbeing

The Context Constanza, et al: Summary of Average Global Value of Annual Ecosystem Services – Coastal:$4,000 (per hectacre per year) – Wetlands: $14,800 – Forest:$970 Braumann, et al: “What is the spatial relationship between ecosystem services supply and consumption?” United Nations: “Recent studies have shown that the overwhelming bulk of humanity is concentrated along or near coasts on just 10% of the earth’s land surface. As of 1998, over half the population of the planet — about 3.2 billion people — lives and works in a coastal strip just 200 kilometers wide (120 miles), while a full two-thirds, 4 billion, are found within 400 kilometers of a coast.”

The Theoretical Arguments Miletti: flood losses are “primarily the consequence of narrow and shortsighted development patterns, cultural premises, and attitudes.” Burby: government investment in flood preventions levees forms a “safe development paradox” Bahr: “What I think was irrational was the manner in which the formerly booming port city built above sea level sprawled into and destroyed a protective coastal swampforest basin.”

Data Analysis Used FIPs Code to join the Counties with Levees list to 2000 Census SF 3 dataset – Dataset included county population, per capita income, and % income below poverty rate – Total income = population x per capita income = proxy for county GDP Exploratory mapping to assess the prevailing trends Statistical analysis to compare the US counties with and without levees – T-test compares average value of population, per capita income, total income, poverty rate

Three Hypothesis Hypothesis 1 – Total productivity is greater in counties with levees. Hypothesis 2 – Personal income is greater in counties with levees. Hypothesis 3 – Poverty rates are less in counties with levees.

The Maps

US Counties with Levees

Population and Counties with Levees

Total Income and Counties with Levees

Per Capita Income and Counties with Levees

Poverty Rate and Counties with Levees

Statistical Results Indicatort-statisticp-valueMean, LeveesMean, No LeveesInterpretation Total Productivity E-13$3,840,812,166$1,168,502,109 Total productivity is nearly 3.3 times greater in counties with levees Per Capita Income < 2.2e-16$18,341$16,846 Persons in counties with levees earned an average of nearing $1,500 more in 2000 Poverty Rate E %15.69% Poverty rate was 2% less in counties with levees

Statistical Results The results support all three of the hypotheses; the difference in the means is statistically significant with substantive implications: Hypothesis 1 – Is productivity greater in counties with levees? => Yes. The average county with levees produces nearly 3.3 times (or $2.6 billion) more in annual goods and services. Hypothesis 2 – Is personal income greater in counties with levees? => Yes, the average resident in a county with levees earns $1,500 more per year. Hypothesis 3 – Is poverty less prevalent in counties with levees? => Yes, the poverty rate averages 2% less in counties with levees.

Louisiana Case Study Levees% LeveesNo Levees% No Levees Number of Parishes % % Total Population 3,228, %1,180, % Total Workers 1,361, %469, % Sum of Total Income $57,219,654, %$18,361,632, % Average of Total Income $1,546,477,135$680,060,455 Average of Per Capita Income $15,055$14,228 Average of Poverty Rate 22.38%21.41%

Louisiana Parishes with Levees

Louisiana Urban Areas and Parishes with Levees

Population Z-score and Parishes with Levees

Total Income Z-score and Parishes with Levees

Per Capita Income Z-Score and Parishes with Levees

Poverty Rate Z-score and Parishes with Levees

Conclusions Human settlement and modification in floodplains: – 55% of American’s live in county with levees – They earn more, produce more, and require less expenditures on poverty programs – In Louisiana, nearly 75% of personal income is earned in counties with levees. Is it really a “paradox” that government’s pursue policies that encourage economic growth and increased tax base? – In 1999, government collected an additional $70 billion in taxes from floodprone counties. – $5.3 billion in total flood loses for that year Is it really “narrow and shortsighted” or “irrational” to want to earn more?